meet need with a profile for preference on the observation resource. Requirements are a preference category (nutrition, medication, care), the preference priority (high/medium/delayed from C-CDA) and with elements of expressor and recorder.

Tracking of reviews and plans for reviews is something that applies to many resources, not just CarePlan (e.g. protocols, standing orders, long term care admissions, etc.). This is something probably best handled by "Task" but will require a fair bit of analysis and discussion with other work groups to agree on approach. Defer to R4. Consider transfer to OO who owns Task

Meetings

Monday Q1

Approving the agenda of the current WGM. No additions and no corrections applied to the agenda.

Demo from Michel Rutten about the FHIR registry. Combine with L-froms on Thursday Q5. See HL7 wiki agenda.

DMP review: do we need to adjust the DMP?

Quorum: Our current DMP requires 3 persons. We still tend to keep this quorum to have enough diversity of standpoints.

Electronic voting: Our current DMP is identical to the standard DMP, but the section on the quorum does not seem viable, because it is difficult to calculate the 90% of a previous call or WGM.

3 options:

Stick to the default DMP (90% of last meeting)

Stick to the standard quorum. (co-chair +3, organizing person + 3))

Equal to the amount of co-chair ( 7 people).

Vote:

2 persons for option 1

4 persons for option 2

2 persons for option 3.

Option 2 prevails. This means that PCWG will divert for the default DMP and use the same calculation the standard quorum calculation.

Action Item for Michael Tan to add the adjustments to DMP.

Chat.HL7.org.

Wayne Kubrick has e-mailed a proposal to use Zulip as a chat platform.

A chat fills a need for fast moving discussions. The FHIR folks usually Zulip for this purpose. The speed of the chat is too high for normal discussion.

A list server discussion requires more structure and is more appropriate for a working group.

Most attendants prefer to stick to e-mails thru the list server. Zulip can still be used occasionally for certain events such as the Clinicians on FHIR.

Discussion on CIMI and the relationship with CDA.

The CIMI should be responsible for the content.

The CDA is more about infrastructure.

There should be a CIMI management board. CIMI would guard that a CIMI product would be consistent in CDA, FHIR or V2. This CIMI management group would resemble the FHIR management group.

There is a call for volunteers to join the CIMI chair. Jay is considering.

Amit Popat reminds the attendees of a request from Austin about the future of HL7v2. This is planned for Monday Q3. **Amit is assigned as the official representative of Patient Care WG.

Monday Q2

Chair: Michael Tan

Scribe: Jay Lyle

Brett Marquard presented an approach for modeling Notes in FHIR. After grappling with some of the content questions, the team decided that the key differentiator is structure, and that a Note is likely a chunk of text, a document, a reference to a resource, or a mixture of these. This approach defers the definition of note content, supporting a richer variety of use cases, while supporting the ability to identify notes via some classification such as the LOINC document ontology.

Most attendees felt this is a reasonable approach.

MM: also address state changes, e.g., signature

LM: docRef is for locating documents on servers. That could be changed.